Mic preamps

[mrmrcoleman]

Hey guys,

I am going to be doing some vocal recording soon. I have a Focusrite Saffire Pro 10 and a couple of SE 2200a's.

I was thinking it might be worth my while to spend some money on a proper vocal channel with built in compression and the like, but I have a question.

If I was to buy the Focusrite Voicemaster Pro, would it have a better preamp than my Saffire already contains? If not, can you recommend another preamp which might help?

I have around 500 euros (750 dollars/400 pounds) to spend.

Thanks!

[KineticSound]

Originally Posted by mrmrcoleman

If I was to buy the Focusrite Voicemaster Pro, would it have a better preamp than my Saffire already contains? If not, can you recommend another preamp which might help?

MrMr:

I'm not 100% what the Saffire preamps are based on, but can say that the entire platinum series from Focusrite (which includes the Voicemaster, TrakMaster, etc.) have the same front-end preamp as the Green's. I have a TrakMaster in my rack, and it's been my favorite pre since the moment I installed it.

Even if the Saffire and the VMP have the same front-end pre, what you're really paying for is Focusrite's compression and eq sections.

David

[Massive Master]

If I were looking for something in that price range, I'd stay far away from channel-strip type pieces and just get a solid preamp.

True's P-Solo, Grace's 101... Something along those lines. In another world of quality over the FR stuff (and almost any "channel strip" I can think of under about a $k or so) IMO.

No reason I can think of to compress vocals on the way in - except to overdrive the input stage even more than you would without a compressor in the chain. IME, the Penta/Platinum (along with 20 other budget-friendly channel strips) sound like cheap preamps going through cheap equalization circuitry being whisked through cheap compression circuitry, etc., etc. Which makes sense, because "you get what you pay for" applies in some cases.

Even though admittedly, the Toft ATC's are a standout in their price range.

Still, $5-600 for a Grace or a True and you're getting an excellent preamp - and no danger overdriving it on the input stage through a cheap compressor.

[Weasel9992]

I agree with John. I find that channel strips usually create more problems than they solve, especially with the noobs. I'd also add that I owned a Voice Master Pro a couple of years ago and *hated* it. Absolutely no redeeming quality whatsoever...sounded horrible on everything I tried it on.

I'd spend your hard-earned money on a really good preamp without all the compression, EQ and other doodads.

Frank

[Massive Master]

I was trying to be a little more "PC" on that, but as long as you mention it, those are pretty much my feelings on it also. And the Eureka. Good lord, how that thing ever got as much market share it has...

[Weasel9992]

Originally Posted by Massive Master

I was trying to be a little more "PC" on that, but as long as you mention it, those are pretty much my feelings on it also. And the Eureka. Good lord, how that thing ever got as much market share it has...

It's the knobs. They were kinda nice. Nifty little blinking lights too.

Frank

[santiu]

How would you guys rate the RNP vs. P-Solo vs. Grace M101?

Don't mean to hi-jack the thread, but I'm looking for a preamp in the same price range. I'm leaning towards the RNP since I love mic'ing things in stereo, and two M101's is too expensive for me. But if it's worth the price difference, then maybe i'll just hold my horses while I save up.

[Massive Master]

The RNP is - well, it's really nice ("really nice" - get it? Yeah, I thought so). Basically without peer in that price range.

I prefer the P-Solo just a whisker - But it's a preference thing. The RNP easily has the "raw quality" necessary to produce a high-quality recording.

[Weasel9992]

Originally Posted by santiu

How would you guys rate the RNP vs. P-Solo vs. Grace M101?

Don't mean to hi-jack the thread, but I'm looking for a preamp in the same price range. I'm leaning towards the RNP since I love mic'ing things in stereo, and two M101's is too expensive for me. But if it's worth the price difference, then maybe i'll just hold my horses while I save up.

Love the RNP. Great value for two channels...I think it beats the P-Solo and Grace preamp for that reason. It isn't sonically any better or worse though.

Frank

[pohaku]

Here's a deal for you:

http://www.gearslutz.com/board/gears...ogic-rack.html

That's a real good price for the combo. Used RNPs usually go for @$425 and used RNCs usually go for @$125. He's asking $500 -- so that is $50 cheaper than the typical used price for both units, plus you get a funklogic rack for them.

[Neeps]

http://homerecording.com/bbs/showthread.php?t=231789

It's a big thread but you can skip to the end for an answer. Just one sample though... bear that in mind.

[santiu]

Neeps, thanks for the link! That was great and extremely useful!

I listened to the samples (older DT770 headphones through a C&C Box amp, not perfect, but I'm at work), and then started reading the thread. I thought A was better, but then with the majority of the people in that thread voting that B was better or that they couldn't hear a difference I got really confused. Finally got to the revelation of the pre-amps. Very interesting. I didn't find the differences to be night-and-day, so I imagine with my mere mortal ears, I won't find much of a difference in stepping up the ladder beyond the RNP. thanks again for the test/link. great stuff.

[Fishmed]

Originally Posted by Massive Master

True's P-Solo, Grace's 101... Something along those lines.

If these are out of your price range because you need two Chan, I would suggest the Sysmetrix SX202.

Great sounding mic pres, and you can get them moded down the road to get more definition out of their signal.

[WhiteStrat]

Originally Posted by Fishmed_Returns

If these are out of your price range because you need two Chan, I would suggest the Sysmetrix SX202.

Great sounding mic pres, and you can get them moded down the road to get more definition out of their signal.

I may be speaking blindly, since I don't most of the other names being bandied about, but I'm with you. I've got 4 channels of SX202 (thanks again. Pohaku) and they do well by me and my music.

Let me put it this way: with my current set up, the 202's account for half of the tracks in a recording I make. If my recording blows--it's ain't the pres.

[mrmrcoleman]

Ok, thanks for all your feedback guys. I was under the impression that compressing on the way in was a must-have, but I'm not sure where I got that from, I must-have dreamt it!

Now for a noob question, so I'm sorry in advance if I'm wasting your time...

As I mentioned above I'm using a Focusrite audio interface to my PC. If I was to go ahead and purchase, say, an RNP how would I get the signal from the RNP to my PC without it being interfered with by the Focusrite?

Is it as simple as just turning down the gain on the Focusrite to 0 so that the built-in preamp isn't being used?

Thanks again!

[Kevin Deschwazi]

Does the focusrite have line inputs? You'd want to use those.

If you're having to pass your sexy new mic pres through the not so good pres in the focusrite then I'd question whether there's any point.

[mrmrcoleman]

Hey Kevin,

Yes it does. Thanks guys!

Mark

[Massive Master]

Originally Posted by mrmrcoleman

Ok, thanks for all your feedback guys. I was under the impression that compressing on the way in was a must-have, but I'm not sure where I got that from, I must-have dreamt it!

Now for a noob question, so I'm sorry in advance if I'm wasting your time...

As I mentioned above I'm using a Focusrite audio interface to my PC. If I was to go ahead and purchase, say, an RNP how would I get the signal from the RNP to my PC without it being interfered with by the Focusrite?

Is it as simple as just turning down the gain on the Focusrite to 0 so that the built-in preamp isn't being used?

Thanks again!

There are a lot (A LOT) of places that tout compression on the way in. Pick any HH/rap site (of course, many of them insist that tracking "as hot as you can without clipping" is a good idea also). So take those suggestions with a healthy dose of common sense. You're not "wasting time" - You're learning. There's always time for that.

You should be able to go into a line input on your interface - Probably won't even have a gain control on it.

When it really comes down to it - Compression on the input stage isn't incredibly uncommon - But it's not at all necessary - and it opens up a can of worms that a lot of "less seasoned" engineers aren't prepared to deal with - Gain staging issues mostly. Uncorrectable over-compression secondary.

If a bit of compression is actually necessary to the material going in that's one thing. If the compressor in question is necessary to the sound (such as, a dB or two of gentle compression from a Manley Variable Mu on a harsh sounding synth pad) that's one thing.

Actually trying to control the dynamics of something on the way in though... The compression is usually too late --- Of course, it's going to be after the preamp - It's compressing a signal that's already damaged from overdriving the preamp. And that allows you to add that much more gain - distorting the signal even more. That and the compressors in question are - uh - questionable in the first place...

90% of the time, you're far better off backing off on the levels (a.k.a. using "normal" or "reasonable" input levels) and taking care of the dynamics in the context of the mix -- which is generally the only way to take care of them.

[KineticSound]

Originally Posted by Massive Master

The compression is usually too late --- Of course, it's going to be after the preamp - It's compressing a signal that's already damaged from overdriving the preamp. And that allows you to add that much more gain - distorting the signal even more. That and the compressors in question are - uh - questionable in the first place...

90% of the time, you're far better off backing off on the levels (a.k.a. using "normal" or "reasonable" input levels) and taking care of the dynamics in the context of the mix -- which is generally the only way to take care of them.

John,
I'd like to keep this dialogue going if you will indulge me... I don't disagree with anything you've said here - I just do it differently and think I can learn from you!

Maybe this goes back to the days working with analog machines, but I always tried to keep the input level as high above the noise floor as possible. I use compression "on the way in" in order to control the dynamic peaks (usually of a vocal, drum, or bass) and still keep the level strong enough that I don't create unnecessary noise during the mix. The compressor threshold on the Focusrite is set so that the majority of the signal going through is not being compressed at all... just the peaks.

I always just assumed it was easiest to do it this way, rather than "riding" the trim knob or input fader. What are your thoughts?

[Bguzaldo]

I would highly recommend the Eureka by Presonus its $500 USD with built in compression, EQ. Also perfect for recording guitar and DI works well on bass. great unit!

-Barrett

[Massive Master]

With tape, it's a completely different story -

HOWEVER: (A) Digital has no inherent noise... (B) Tape decks followed the same "rules" as everything else -- 0dBVU was 0dBVU.

0dBVU is usually around -18dBFS... Although I understand some Apogee converters are calibrated to -12dBFS. Personally, my tracking converters are at -20dBFS (and I "pretend" they're at -24).

If you're only compressing the peaks, that's less "nasty" than hammering on the whole signal. But it's when those peaks are being compressed - That's when you really need to know how hard your preamp is running. And if it's catching those peaks, there's no real way to tell.

In 24-bit, anything above -20dBFS or so is a "good hot signal" -- I just prefer to keep that signal as pristine and clean as possible for as long as possible. If the peaks are bringing you over nominal, the compressor is allowing it to stay there more often. Never a good thing.

(EDIT) Didn't we just mention what a POS the Eureka was a few posts back?

[KineticSound]

That's helpful, thanks. I may try to expirament more with this... tracking everything at a little lower level and bypassing the compressor entirely - then compressing during the mix and see how I like it.

[Massive Master]

More here if you're bored...

http://www.massivemastering.com/blog...ng_Levels.html

Seriously though - If you've been in the "hot without clipping" camp forever, your entire life (musically speaking) is about to change - drastically.

What you'll probably notice right off the bat -- Better sound (duh...), more clarity and focus between instruments, much more responsive EQ and dynamics, ease of mixing. For starters.

[matthewsquires]

1234567890

[Massive Master]

Originally Posted by matthewsquires

1234567890

??? (10 characters)